Letters to the Editor

Posted: Sunday, March 05, 2006

Leave school policies

to local districts

We ought to think very hard before embracing State Rep. Bobby Reese's proposal requiring school districts to create a mechanism whereby parents can refuse to allow their children to participate in any school activity they don't deem appropriate.

In his commentary ("Legislation on school clubs will empower Georgia parents," Feb. 25) Rep. Reese described his legislative bill requiring school officials to notify each parent about what after-school clubs are available on campus, the name of the club's student adviser, the group's mission and a description of past or present activities.

That sounds great at first look. But is that really what our community wants? Do we really want the state to become more involved in the operation of our schools?

It wasn't too long ago that most communities were outraged with the thought of government participation in public education. Politicians were quick to scream "local control" any time someone suggested that the state or federal government should determine how we educate our children. But something must have changed.

Rep. Reese is telling us now that the state should participate in the operation of every school throughout Georgia. That comes in the wake of the federal government requiring states to set minimum standards for the education of children.

What's next? Possibly there should be state laws requiring students to wear uniforms. They shouldn't leave teachers and principals out of this category.

Rep. Reese believes that his law will empower parents and their children to communicate with their school and teachers more effectively. Most of us agree that if parents were more involved with the education of their children, students would do better. But how does that translate into a state law mandating school boards to set specific operational procedures?

School boards and superintendents are charged with the authority and responsibility to create policies and procedures that reflect a community's attitude about the education of its children. The authority to set procedures whereby school officials must notify parents about activities under their control is already in place.

DAVID K. LERCH, Ph.D.

Savannah

(Editor's note: The writer is a former member of the Savannah-Chatham County Board of Education.)

Mr. Sapp, let us not confuse sexuality with violent sexual behavior. Comparing Mike Tyson to President Clinton is absurd, and you should be ashamed of yourself for making a mockery out of a term that describes a sick, ferocious and disturbed person.

Mike Tyson was sentenced to prison for 10 years for rape and deviate sexual conduct. He has proved to be a sadistic individual, and has been sued and arrested repeatedly over the years for his violent acts towards women.

Bill Clinton cheated on his wife with a willing partner and lied about it. To me, that's a big difference.

If you are so concerned with sexual predators Mr. Sapp, why don't you make this a social issue, rather than dwelling on old politics?

EMILY DAVIDIAN

Savannah

Where is the sympathy for

Christians and Jews?

Mosques are burned (one Islamic sect, the Sunnis, torch and bomb the mosques of the Shiites and vice-versa), offensive cartoons are published in Denmark and this causes worldwide murder and mayhem by the Islamic extermists.

The president immediately offers his deepest sympathy and apologies. To whom is he apologizing? They're doing it to each other!

In south Lebanon, Hezbollah is slaughtering Christians with impunity. Four years ago in Bethlehem, Palestinians took over the church of the Nativity, befouled it in a most obscene way and held the priests hostage until they were rescued by the Israeli army.

Synagogues all over the world are burned and defiled. Jews are depicted (in cartoons and elsewhere) in the most vile and blasphemous manner.

Where is the outrage and condemnation of the perpetrators of these atrocities?

Where is the sympathy and apologies to the Christians and Jews?

WALTER LOWE

Savannah

Story on Episcopal church

got terminology wrong

One would assume that there are no Episcopalians on your staff, else the Feb. 27 article, "St. Andrew's joins conservative Episcopals" would have never made it to copy.

First, we are "Episcopals" not "Episcopalians." "Episcopal" is a noun, as in "the Episcopal Church." "Episcopalians" is an adjective.

Secondly, we are not congregants, we are congregations of communicants, and rather than being in communication with the see of Canterbury, we are in communion.

A little research in such matters would be helpful.

MARJORY BRUCE STEPHENS

Savannah

Welcome to our redesigned Opinion and Commentary pages. We hope you like our new, updated look.

These pages reflect our newspaper's continuing commitment to be a force for good in our community. We believe that the best way to meet challenges and solve problems is through informed opinion and lively debate. No one has a monopoly in the marketplace of ideas. But we want our pages to be local arena where ideas do battle - and may the strongest argument win.

You will see the same items on our new pages as you did on our old ones - editorials that appear on the upper left side of the Opinion page and represent the views of our editorial board, letters to the editor, local and syndicated columns, the Doonesbury cartoon and Mark Streeter's editorial cartoon. So in most respects, the content hasn't changed. Just the packaging.

And we hope you approve. If you don't, that's fine, too. But please, let us know either way. We want to make these pages useful as well as compelling.

I can be reached at 652-0343 or by e-mail at tom.barton@savannahnow.com. I also plan to be blogging, so I can be reached there as well. Your opinions matter. We hope to hear from you.